On Mortality and Ageing

My chess partner, who I mentioned
One of my 'things' about chess is the actual pieces.
Whoever decided that a knight should be symbolised by a horse's head?
I mean it could at least have been a knightly helmet, maybe with a plume, or even a sword, but no!

Someone said
"I'll tell you what, let's get rid of the knight altogether, we can just use the head from his transportation"
 
My chess partner, who I mentioned above having stage 5 prostate cancer, was given a drug that perfectly suited his condition. Originally he was given only a few years to live but now the symptoms have totally disappeared.

Unfortunately he now has bowel cancer and is having a section of his bowel removed in a few days.

His medical history is one of luck and bad luck.

On retiring as a teacher he retrained as a tree surgeon. He fell out of a tree and broke his spine. Surgery fixed him up ok wit a couple of steel rods.

Later during a checkup on his spine the x-ray revealed a cyst on one of his kidneys. It was removed.

Later a checkup revealed his prostate cancer. Drug treatment did the trick.

Now another checkup has revealed his bowel cancer.

It could be argued that if he hadn't fallen out if the tree he'd probably be dead by now.

Falling out the tree likely had nothing to do with the bowel cancer. A family history of cancer is a probable factor here. One thing I have heard on the subject of this type cancer is that smokers seem to be at risk for it.

As far as mortality is concerned , there are no guarantees whatsoever . You can do everything right in terms diet and exercise , reducing stress , not smoking or drinking , limit sun exposure, watch your weight , take vitamins and have regular check ups etc and still die at an early age and, you can do everything wrong and still end up living to a ripe old age .
 
Last edited:
True, but the do everything right probably does help quite a few people. And do everything wrong and live to a ripe old age - well there is always the possibility you could have lived even longer, or lived healthier to that old age. As you say with bowel cancer, there is still the genetic factor, as in it is thought that with some cancers there is a predisposition and to avoid the factors that trigger it seems wise. There may yet be other genetic factors to be found with all sorts of diseases. Living healthy and active into your old age is a target worth going for, not just the total in years.

By the way, on the subject of active, I'd like to recommend Stecco treatments - Home - Manipolazione Fasciale - it can be hard work to find a practitioner, because the Stecco Institute only advertise people who have taken all four levels of qualifications. For the UK, you have to search around podiatrists, physiotherapists, chiropractors and osteopaths to find ones who've also trained in Fascial Manipulation (and avoid the Stucco websites...). What you are looking for is fascial manipulation and it will only be practiced by someone who has already trained in a hands on medical specialty that includes a thorough grounding in anatomy - as in physios etc as per earlier. There is also Fascial Relaxation which is not the same and is an alternative therapy. So having said that, what I am on about? Well, the deep fascia encloses the body and the organs and is an interwoven web of tissue. When you are injured, or even just from wear and tear, it can get bunched up into knots. That then restricts movement and makes it harder work. I've been having treatments for over a year, six points at a time (there are a lot of points) and it has made a massive difference for me in terms of bending down, walking, picking things up, twisting to the side - it is just easier, and far less tiring. I'm not at retirement age and in any case the practitioner I see was telling me about an 80+ y.o. who'd been struggling badly to walk upstairs, but after treatments to release the fascia around his hips and thighs, stairs were now easy. In the UK there are a limited number but gradually increasing. I gather there are a couple of training courses each year.
 
One of my 'things' about chess is the actual pieces.
Whoever decided that a knight should be symbolised by a horse's head?
I mean it could at least have been a knightly helmet, maybe with a plume, or even a sword, but no!

Someone said
"I'll tell you what, let's get rid of the knight altogether, we can just use the head from his transportation"
It might be the other way round. The knight not symbolised by a horse's head, but the horse's head associated with and named a knight.
The game (and I assume the way the pieces look as well) were 'invented' a long time ago. Before the very first knight. Or the first bishop.

In Dutch several pieces are called differently:
knight - horse
rook - tower
bishop - walker
The question is, what do the pieces really represent?

EDIT: Oops, sorry. Slightly of topic, except perhaps for chess, an age-old game.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads


Back
Top